The One That Hopes You'll Forgive His Cynicism. . .

According to Nanny Beeb:

The Conservatives have set out plans to reverse what they describe as "the rise of the surveillance state".

Well, if correct that is certainly a step in the right direction.

They have pledged to scrap two new databases - the ID card register and ContactPoint - and strengthen powers of the Information Commissioner. The Conservatives say they want to restore public trust in the use of personal data by the state.

I'll believe it when I see it. You see, as far as I'm concerned, if any of the Big Three told me that the sky is blue and the sea is wet, I'd go and check it out with my own eyes.

Is it going to make me vote Tory in the general election? Nope.

The One That Knows It Is The Beginning Of The End. . .

Amazing but true, there is other news other than the death of Michael Jackson, and one can't help but wonder if it is being used to bury bad news or objectionable policies.

Here's a prime example of a thoroughly objectionable policy:

About 1,000 homes and businesses will be affected by security and policing arrangements for this year's Labour Party conference in Brighton.

During the conference, officers will visit households and companies nearby to confirm identities of people there.

What the flying fuckety-fuck? I'd like to know first of all, what powers Sussex police have to go knocking on peoples' doors and demand to see ID of the person opening it. Setting aside the fact that it is a disgusting attack on the liberties of those being doorstepped, what if the person living there has no driving licence or passport? No, that is not an argument in favour of an ID Card scheme, it is an argument in favour of the State and the police minding their own fucking business.

It gets better:

Supt Grenville Wilson said that hosting the conference at a time of international tension inevitably involved heightened security.

But he said: "We are keen to stress that there is no specific threat to the conference."

However that won't stop him sending his officers to make sure that everyone knows they're on a yellow card anyway. I'm surprised he doesn't put a Police Community Surveillance Officer in every home to make sure the residents are sat quietly with their hands on the table in full view for the duration.

Where the hell do these fuckers get off?

During the event from 27 September to 1 October, officers will seal off the area around the Brighton Centre, Hilton Metropole and Grand hotels and Russell Road NCP car park to form a secure "island" site.

Perhaps if this Government hadn't acted like such a bunch of arse-clowns for the last decade, hadn't shat on everyone, nannied us, hectored us and had actually listened to what we were saying, then they wouldn't need to seal off huge swathes of Brighton to prevent people trying to kill them.

But security is security, and don't you dare try to argue about it. Don't you dare try to question the authorities. Tell us who you are, why you are sat there in your own home, and what it is you intend to do whilst you're there.

This is an absolute disgrace, to spy on people whilst they walk down the street minding their own business is bad enough. Now they are sending people round to our houses, and they don't even have the decency to attempt to do it covertly. Fuckers. Fucking fuckers.

I wonder what would happen to this poor old bugger if he produced a repeat performance this year?

The One That Would Vote For Her. . .

Stella Rimington, the former head of MI5 is someone I'm swiftly getting a liking for. She spoke out about the 42 days detention when all the fur was flying about that, and now she's spoken out about ministers using the threat of terror to clamp down on civil liberties.

There is a school of thought that all this is a Labour plan to have control over every facet of our lives, the idea that real power comes not from the ballot box (and let's face it, political power doesn't reside in Westminster any more, it lives in Brussels) but from control over the individual. That means we must all be measured, recorded, tracked and visible to the powers that be at all times.

The other school of thought is that we are half way to hell on the road signposted 'Good Intentions'. I agree that a significant number of people are of the opinon that what is being done is because those in power really, honestly believe that it is for the best.

I think the truth lies somewhere in between. A small number of sociopathic control freaks, using the dogwhistle of terror to jolly along all those who want to do the right thing, those who say 'OK, perhaps we can let this one go then.' But before they realise it, the zealots are knocking on the door making the case for the next liberty to be taken away. Those reasonable people then consider the point, not for a moment thinking back to how they would have felt a year earlier if this had been suggested.

And so the next one is gone.

Old Holborn was out yesterday, at New Scotland Yard, taking photographs. It is now possible to be arrested for taking photos of a police officer, or a public building, or any public scene that is judged to be likely to support terrorism or acts in preperation thereof. Well, who makes these judgements?

We've seen footage in the past of officer and PCSOs who do not like being photographed and filmed, now those officers can decide that they don't like it and can arrest you for it. Of course it would never end up in court, but you could find yourself locked up for no other real reason than a policeman has taken a dislike to you, or you've proved an inconvenience, or pehaps taken footage which shows an officer doing something wrong, something illegal, and that officer wants it out of the way.

Apparently the feeling is that police officers need protecting from terrorists. I can remember no instance of a police officer being directly targeted by terrorists since Yvonne Fletcher was killed by a shot outside the Libyan Embassy in London in (appropriately enough) 1984.

Well what's the next step in protecting these officers? Removal of their collar numbers so they cannot be identified? Anonymous 'secret' police stations, with cells that don't really exist, for crimes where a solicitor may not be present at interview? Why not just dress our police officers like this?

I don't blame the rank and file officers, but our police force has changed, it seems to me that their primary function is no longer the prevention and detection of crime or disorder, but is now to be deployed in a manner that the political class finds advantageous to them. I have little dealing with the police on this level, but I know this.

I know that if my house is broken into, if my car is stolen, if my property is damaged I will not see a police officer. A PCSO may pop round to take details for recording purposes and then, someone with an eye on targets, will attempt to 'no crime' it, even if it is recorded as a crime no action to investigate will be made. I mean, I've got insurance, that's what it's for. However, I also know that if I walk down the street dressed in an unusual style, take a photograph of a public building, or sit, reading a book, on a bench in a public park that just happens to be near a playground, I will be pounced upon, questioned, searched and perhaps even detained.

This is not the police service I pay for, and it is not a style of policing that is suitable for any country which says it is a free democracy. We're not there yet, but the actions of ministers, ACPO and over excited front line staff take us ever closer to the Stasi and Securitate, and it is almost within touching distance.

The One That Is Saying 'Population de la France, Bravo!'

Yes, the French go on strike at the drop of a hat. Whether I agree with them or not is irrelevant, bloody hell do I respect the French for getting up off their arses and pointing out that they are pissed off, and will not put up with it.

And they've kicked off in Paris tonight.

Meanwhile the Lyonnais mourn the loss of civil liberties.

How long until we see scenes like this on the streets of the UK, could anyone care less, or are we all too concerned about the recent spat between two plastic titted, bottle orange 'celebrities'?

The One That Thinks It Is A Bloody Shame. . .

So the jury at the De Menezes Coroner's inquest has returned an open verdict.

They really had very little choice given that the Coroner prohibited them from returning a verdict that they may have wanted to. It appears the Coroner was under a good deal of pressure from the legal teams representing the police to disallow a verdict of unlawful killing.

I wasn't in the courtroom, I don't have all the facts, but it seems outrageous to me that an independent figure is either pressured into or makes the decision off their own back to make this ruling. It kind of makes the whole exercise a pointless one. Given the information that has come out it would seem reasonable to suggest that the jury would have returned that very verdict they were forbidden from passing.

So the list gets a little longer:

Arrest of opposition MPs
Collection of communications data for all
Entry of all citizens onto a DNA database
The right of entry without a warrant
Systematic and obtrusive surveillance
The right of long-term detention without charge
The right to arrest and detain without detailing the evidence against the individual
The right to stop and search for no apparent reason
The right to imprison those who cannot/will not provide ID on request
The removal of habeas corpus
The extradition of citizens to a third country without prima facie evidence
The removal of the right to trial by jury
The gagging of juries where they exist
The removal of the right to protest outside Parliament
The arrest of dissenters at political rallies under anti-terror laws

And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense.